HuffPost: Andrew Napolitano...Bush and Cheney "Absolutely should have been indicted"

[zoony]

People are proving my first post in this thread so far. None of you want to deal with the reality that this has absolutely nothing to do with left v right or a clear cut legal issue. This isn't politics as usual. This isn't the justice system. This is pure national pride and potential shame because ultimately you can't put a President on trial for national policy moves without putting the nation on trial with him. The US will not stand to be humiliated in such a fashion while the world watches. We'd rather allow behavior we supposedly oppose to continue than to admit it happened and that it was wrong. Maybe in 50 years some President will issue an apology for it once it's history book fodder and all players involved are dead.

Or, according to a large percentage of legal scholars, they acted completely within the law? :whoknows: And those that disagree admit there is a lot of gray area.

And there is a tiny fringe saying it is a clear cut case, including Rosie ODonnell and the Fox News guy.

Pardon me while I say you have a flare for the dramatic.

....

[cjcdaman]

This is hysterical. You bring up "FAUX News" in threads more often than anyone I know. But when it suits the agenda, you're more than willing to use one of their hosts/contributors as a source

:notworthy

ASF, gotta love him.

[Ax]

Care to see what he thinks of Lincoln, FDR, and LBJ?

[zoony]

Care to see what he thinks of Lincoln, FDR, and LBJ?

They should all be posthumously tried. Especially FDR. He was a tyrant, a bigot, and an embarrassment to the history of freedom we enjoy in this country.

...

[Destino]

Or, according to a large percentage of legal scholars, they acted completely within the law? :whoknows: And those that disagree admit there is a lot of gray area.

And there is a tiny fringe saying it is a clear cut case, including Rosie ODonnell and the Fox News guy.

Pardon me while I say you have a flare for the dramatic.

....

Do those large percentage of scholars actually know what they did? I remember the Bush administration pretty well and my favorite part of it is their dodging every attempt to collect information on exactly what they were doing. Losing emails. Sudden "fires" in the records room. Refusing to have their people show up for subpoenas. Hiding who they met with and why. Putting whistle blowers on trial. Flat out lying to the people about wire tapping and torture.

When a large majority of legal scholars have an opinion when it's clear that an investigation would be needed to even get an idea as to what actually happened makes me think those legal scholars are full of ****. It's like me telling you the President of Paraguay has done nothing wrong. I don't even know who the hell that is but hey why not?

What you have here is evidence that merits an investigation. People decided to skip to the conclusion part though and we're supposed to pretend that makes perfect sense.

[twa]

They should all be posthumously tried. Especially FDR. He was a tyrant, a bigot, and an embarrassment to the history of freedom we enjoy in this country.

...

Hrump Hrump...Abe was the beginning of the fall though

[zoony]

Do those large percentage of scholars actually know what they did? I remember the Bush administration pretty well and my favorite part of it is their dodging every attempt to collect information on exactly what they were doing. Losing emails. Sudden "fires" in the records room. Refusing to have their people show up for subpoenas. Hiding who they met with and why. Putting whistle blowers on trial. Flat out lying to the people about wire tapping and torture.

When a large majority of legal scholars have an opinion when it's clear that an investigation would be needed to even get an idea as to what actually happened makes me think those legal scholars are full of ****. It's like me telling you the President of Paraguay has done nothing wrong. I don't even know who the hell that is but hey why not?

What you have here is evidence that merits an investigation. People decided to skip to the conclusion part though and we're supposed to pretend that makes perfect sense.

The OP is about suspending haebus corpus and gitmo. Both of which have very strong legal precedent. It kind of comes down to opinion.

You and Rosie O'Donnel -vs- the rest of us

[JimboDaMan]

Do those large percentage of scholars actually know what they did? I remember the Bush administration pretty well and my favorite part of it is their dodging every attempt to collect information on exactly what they were doing. Losing emails. Sudden "fires" in the records room. Refusing to have their people show up for subpoenas. Hiding who they met with and why. Putting whistle blowers on trial. Flat out lying to the people about wire tapping and torture.

Ah, good times, good times. My personal favorite was ducking oversight by claiming the vice president is not a part of the executive branch.

[Ax]

They should all be posthumously tried. Especially FDR. He was a tyrant, a bigot, and an embarrassment to the history of freedom we enjoy in this country.

...

Of course they should. And, since some of Bush's "crimes" are being continued today, I'm sure the OP supports the prosecution of President Obama, as well.

Being non partisan, and all.

[Thiebear]

Well, Once the Justice Dept. states its no longer allowed shouldn't all those afterwards be prosecuted?

[Destino]

The OP is about suspending haebus corpus and gitmo. Both of which have very strong legal precedent. It kind of comes down to opinion.

You and Rosie O'Donnel -vs- the rest of us

Do you even know what went on at Gitmo? Who was sent there? What the standard of evidence was? If that standard was always followed? ... do you know this to be true or is this what has been revealed to date? You can't really separate that from my prior post which demonstrate a history of half truth and avoidance.

As usual the majority represents "average" intelligence and a herd mentality.

[zoony]

Do you even know what went on at Gitmo? Who was sent there? What the standard of evidence was? If that standard was always followed? ... do you know this to be true or is this what has been revealed to date?

Do you know this for all prior prisoners of war? No? You're not even applying the same standard? Why not?

[Destino]

Do you know this for all prior prisoners of war? No? You're not even applying the same standard? Why not?

Are we talking about all prisoners of war? I thought we were talking about Gitmo. Specifically a place that was set up to circumvent US law and international agreements by an administration with a well documented history of avoiding investigations. A place where the behavior we DO know went on was sufficient to throw the nation into a debate as to what constitutes torture even though we could never get a straight answer as to what they were actually doing.

Like I said previously Zoony. There is a big pile of evidence screaming "look closer here" but the majority would rather ignore that and just go with "nah... I bet it was all good man"

[twa]

There is a big pile of evidence screaming "look closer here" but the majority would rather ignore that and just go with "nah... I bet it was all good man"

Not me.... I say indict them for letting the ****s go free.

[zoony]

Are we talking about all prisoners of war? I thought we were talking about Gitmo.

Isn't Gitmo where we sent the POW's?

[Larry]

Ah, good times, good times. My personal favorite was ducking oversight by claiming the vice president is not a part of the executive branch.

Doonesbury did about a weeks worth of strips, back then, in which Cheney explained that the Vice President is actually the Commander In Chief of the fourth branch of government, The Black Branch. (Which is created by the classified parts of the Constitution.)

[Destino]

Isn't Gitmo where we sent the POW's?

POW? What POW? You mean "enemy combatants" don't you?

[Thiebear]

Are we talking about all prisoners of war? I thought we were talking about Afghanistan. Specifically a place that was set up to circumvent US law and international agreements by an administration with a well documented history of avoiding investigations. A place where the behavior we DO know went on was sufficient to throw the nation into a debate as to what constitutes torture even though we could never get a straight answer as to what they were actually doing.

Like I said previously Zoony. There is a big pile of evidence screaming "look closer here" but the majority would rather ignore that and just go with "nah... I bet it was all good man"

I only had to change 1 word to make it topical for todays events.

CIA prisons shut down, everything else might be the same?

[mbws]

Not me.... I say indict them for letting the ****s go free.

Hell Yeah! Especially those God Damned innocent ones!

:effinpolitics:

[Seabee1973]

Ill make sure if i have a chance to capture bin laden when im in afghanistan over the next 8 months if i dont have an arrest warrent ill just let him walk free